MUSA KHAN Versus THE JUDGE FAMILY COURT AND ANOTHER
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioner husband's constitutional petition arising out of a matrimonial dispute. The core legal questions pertained to the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court and whether valid grounds existed for the grant of khula to the respondent wife. The Supreme Court observed that both issues were concluded by findings of fact recorded by the lower forums. Holding that the High Court's reluctance to interfere with factual findings in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction did not suffer from any legal infirmity, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition. The judgment reaffirms the established principle that concurrent or concluded findings of fact by subordinate tribunals in matrimonial matters are generally not subject to interference in writ jurisdiction or on further appeal unless a patent illegality or jurisdictional defect is demonstrated.
- Whether findings of fact regarding territorial jurisdiction of a Family Court can be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction?
- Whether the High Court should re-examine findings of fact relating to the grant of khula in a constitutional petition?
- Can leave to appeal be granted against a High Court judgment refusing to disturb factual findings in a matrimonial matter?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-Leave to appeal has been sought) from judgment dated 13-8-1983 of the Lahore High Court; whereby a Constitutional petition filed in a matrimonial matter, by the husband/I petitioner, was dismissed.
On both the questions raised before us; namely, territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court and the existence of grounds for grant of khula to respondent, the matter stands concluded by findings of fact. The approach of the High Court showing reluctance to interfere with such finding does not suffer from any infirmity.
The petition is dismissed.